Cognitive Semiotics in Argumentation: A Theoretical Exploration

Argumentation 29 (2):157-176 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Argumentation is a cognitive category. Texts cannot be said to be argumentation, nor can argumentation be said to lie in texts. This is an almost trivial semiotic point of departure, but it is quite relevant nevertheless. In this contribution, three reasons are developed to emphasize and to articulate the semiotic component of argumentation to show that it is a crucial element that cannot be disregarded. Two of these reasons are mentioned only in passing as other contributions in this volume deal with them more substantially. The third reason, being that argumentation requires an exchange of discourse worlds and that consequently the mimetic construction of these discourse worlds is part of the argumentation, is discussed in some detail in this paper. It will be argued that a lack of attention for the mimetics of argumentation is regrettable, both theoretically and practically. Focusing on the mimetics raises questions concerning the dominant ‘propositional’ format of argumentation assumed to be essential for argumentative assessment

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,654

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Two Forms of the Straw Man.Robert Talisse & Scott F. Aikin - 2006 - Argumentation 20 (3):345-352.
Argumentation and Transformation.Maeve Cooke - 2002 - Argumentation 16 (1):81-110.
“This Argument Fails for Two Reasons…”: A Linguistic Analysis of Judicial Evaluation Strategies in US Supreme Court Judgments. [REVIEW]Davide Mazzi - 2010 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 23 (4):373-385.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-07-24

Downloads
33 (#494,642)

6 months
7 (#472,807)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?